Try the political quiz

23 Replies

 @ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...12mos12MO

No

 @9Z9CNNRdisagreed…3mos3MO

Children diagnosed with leukaemia, or other medical conditions with treatments that have adverse effects like infertility, are often too young to consent to treatment, as they may not understand all factors. In cases where they do, they should not be subject to choosing between the possibility of having children and combatting their disease.

Similarly to my pro choice opinion, the decision to freeze embryos should be decided by the patient, or the next of kin where the patient is unable to advocate for themselves.

 @9MD6JSNagreed…9mos9MO

A frozen embryo is no more alive than an egg in an Overy or a sperm in a testicle. It is a medical sample that may possibly become a viable pregnancy one day.

 @ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...12mos12MO

Yes

 @9ZCRZTSdisagreed…3mos3MO

frozen embryos re not children and the government should not get to have a say over what a woman wants to do with her body

 @9Z9CNNRagreed…3mos3MO

Similar to my pro choice opinion, I believe this decision should only be made by the person undergoing this treatment, or next of kin if the patient lacks capacity.

 @9MD6R85Independentdisagreed…9mos9MO

Life does not begin at conception. Frozen embryos can be corrupted and damaged, there is no guarantee they will every be implanted, gestated, born, or indeed survive

 @9MD6JSNdisagreed…9mos9MO

If frozen embryos are people then they are entitled to all the rights bestowed under the UN convention of Human Rights so who is going to ensure they receive these rights. Who is legally responsible for them? Who gets prosecuted if they die? Do we have to attempt to implant each embryo regardless of its stability?

 @9ZGSPPYanswered…3mos3MO

If a woman had no embryos left except the ones she froze and they got damaged then Yes they would be considered HER children to be ... yet a life of a child is a conscious born one. So No also

 @9YM9F27answered…3mos3MO

It depends on the circumstances. If someone has frozen their eggs, eg due to illness, and upon going to begin retrieval they have been lost / destroyed, the individual whose eggs they are should be fairly compensated - especially if they are no longer in a position to produce their own.

 @9YM7NHXanswered…3mos3MO

Yes, as long as they're at the stage of developmnent where a brain has formed and is firing neurons.

 @9ZSJ628Social Democratsanswered…2mos2MO

Create new idea of pre-birth status. Giving rights to frozen embryos but not considering them fully children

 @9ZS7DQ8answered…2mos2MO

Depends on the age of the embryo, for example an embryo lasts until week 10. I would have a much easier time considering a 10 week embryo a child to a 1 week old embryo.

 @9ZRNSY6People Before Profitanswered…2mos2MO

Frozen Embryos should be treated as a major personal asset and protected under law, but is not a child.

 @9ZHTGD6 answered…3mos3MO

If embryos were frozen by a patient then there is an intent to have a child, therefore should be treated as such.

 @9ZBSFRHanswered…3mos3MO

 @9K97TWYanswered…12mos12MO

Embryos don't breathe inside the mother. If it doesn't breathe, it is by definition not "alive" in the literal sense, thus not children nor murder to discard of.

 @9M7PKH8answered…9mos9MO

No but the protection of frozen embryos is less to do with health and more to do with the companies storing them - good question

 @9KQZ7Y5Aontúanswered…11mos11MO

Yes, but if they’re accidentally lost/freezer breaks, the company can’t be sued for loss of life/murder etc.

Demographics

Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion

Loading data...